Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2026 » June » 15
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 16: A TRIAL ALL ABOUT CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 16: A TRIAL ALL ABOUT CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

June 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

For many years this blog has taken a particular interest in cases about contributory negligence.   This partly because the issue is not dealt with in detail in many places and secondly because of the major practical consequences contributory negligence can…

THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION: THE KEY ELEMENTS, THE GUIDANCE AND THREE USEFUL CHECKLISTS

THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION: THE KEY ELEMENTS, THE GUIDANCE AND THREE USEFUL CHECKLISTS

June 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

Last week we looked at the major changes and new elements of the SRA Guidance “Effective Supervision”.  The Guidance  contains a totally new section on supervision in litigation.   Clearly a detailed knowledge of this guidance is essential to all litigators…

COST BITES 401: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS TRIAL JUDGE'S DECISION ON COSTS: THE COMPLICATIONS THAT OCCUR WHEN A COURT IS ASKED TO TAKE DISHONESTY INTO ACCOUNT WHEN MAKING AN AWARD OF COSTS...

COST BITES 401: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS TRIAL JUDGE’S DECISION ON COSTS: THE COMPLICATIONS THAT OCCUR WHEN A COURT IS ASKED TO TAKE DISHONESTY INTO ACCOUNT WHEN MAKING AN AWARD OF COSTS…

June 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

Here the Court of Appeal grappled with some interesting issues when it overturned a trial judge’s decision to make no order for costs.   The Court of Appeal stated that although the judge had been critical of the conduct of the…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT ARE THE RULES IF A COURT ORDER DOES NOT STATE A SPECIFIC DATE FOR THE PAYMENT OF AN ORDER FOR COSTS?

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT ARE THE RULES IF A COURT ORDER DOES NOT STATE A SPECIFIC DATE FOR THE PAYMENT OF AN ORDER FOR COSTS?

June 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Sometimes it may appear that this series is a bit too “basic”, dealing with things that (surely) everyone involves in litigation knows. However, more often than not, the topics are chosen because recent events have show that there is a…

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • PERSONAL INJURY MATTERS 17(2): LIABILITY CATCHUP (2): A SUCCESSFUL STRESS AT WORK CLAIM CONSIDERED
  • A JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE PREVENTED A DEFENDANT TENANT SPEAKING AT A POSSESSION HEARING JUST BECAUSE THEY HAD NOT FILED A DEFENCE: THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES HAVE PRIMACY OVER A PEREMPTORY ORDER
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN A LITIGATOR MAKES A STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENT: A USEFUL CHECKLIST ON THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF
  • EXPERT WATCH 56: A SECTION OF A JUDGMENT THAT SPECIFICALLY CRITICISES A MEDICAL EXPERT: “I WAS STRUCK BY THE ABSENCE OF A RIGOROUS AND CAREFUL MULTIDISCPLINARY APPROACH TO THIS ISSUES IN THIS CASE”
  • EXPERT WATCH 55: WAS THIS WAR? (OR CAUSED BY WAR): TRIAL JUDGE CONSIDERS THE EVIDENCE OF TWO EXPERTS ON GEOPOLITICS, BUT FINDS ONE IS PARTISAN

Top Posts

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: AS STRONGLY WORDED A REFUSAL AS I HAVE SEEN: THE CONCEPT "DOES NOT EMBODY A PRINCIPLE OF "BREACH NOW REPENT LATER"
A SOLICITOR SHOULD JUST NOT BE SAYING THIS IS IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: IT "STRAYED WELL BEYOND WHAT SHE COULD LEGALLY GIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT FROM HER OWN KNOWLEDGE INCLUDED HEARSAY FROM AN UNNAMED SOURCE AND INCLUDED STATEMENTS OF OPINION WHICH SHE DID NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO GIVE..."
THE ONLINE PROCEDURE (RULES AND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS) RULES 2026 COME INTO FORCE ON THE 7th SEPTEMBER: HERE IS A SUMMARY (AND THE RULES THEMSLVES)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LITIGATION: AN UPDATE ON CONSULTATION FINDINGS FROM THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL
WHERE THINGS WENT WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND STOPPING IT HAPPENING TO YOU) 2: ADVISING A CLIENT THAT THEY ARE NOT LIABLE FOR COSTS BECAUSE PROCEEDINGS HAVE NOT BEEN SERVED

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.